Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

110

(post is archived)

[–] • 5 pts

This is not what the hate crime statute was for," says the ACLU's Mary Catherine Roper. "This is criminalizing pure speech and that violates the First Amendment."

Of course not goyim it only is used against whites. I hope this shit get contested on a federal level the next time a white person is charged with hate speech.

[–] • 4 pts

I think that the hate crime statute is bullshit and should be rid of, but I think that it's application in this instance is kind of entertaining.

[–] • 3 pts

It's hilarious when abuses of power backfire on a group but yeah it should not be legal.

[–] • 1 pt

Absolutely. I can't help but be smug when the shit they sling flies back at them.

[–] • 2 pts

I was going to comment to bring attention to that line alone. Good eyes there Sun.

[–] • 3 pts

I like the last little chunk of this article where it asks if a hate crime database or classification ever helps to prevent/solve crimes and no one can come up with an instance.

Racially motivated crime sucks, but at the end of the day it's still just a crime with a motive- one that's near and dear to people, but it's a crime with a motive.

[–] • 1 pt

We fucking tried to warn them. Any law they implement will eventually be used against you. But no no no no no... we gotta protect everyone from those nasty words.